FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Rhonda Porter: 402-391-2273, Dave Nabity: 402-618-6759

Nabity Introduces "Plan for Shared Responsibility" to Solve OPS Controversy

(February 2, 2006—Omaha, NE) In an effort to end the Omaha-area school consolidation controversy, Republican candidate for governor Dave Nabity introduced the “Plan for Shared Responsibility,” which would reassign low-performing schools in the Omaha Public School (OPS) district to outlying suburban districts, rather than consolidating suburban schools into OPS.

The Nabity plan would reassign 23 OPS schools with nearly 12,000 students to eight neighboring school districts, downsizing OPS by 25% or more and greatly enhancing the racial and income diversity of the greater Omaha area.

“OPS recently invoked an 1891 law and claimed the right to take over schools in existing suburban districts,” Nabity said. “The entire metropolitan area has been launched into a state of panic, because the very nature of parental choice is being threatened. Many parents move to suburbs such as Westside, Ralston, Millard and Elkhorn expressly to place their children in districts known for high-quality education. It’s their right to do this. Parents must be allowed to educate their children the way they want by choosing their district.”

“On the other hand, the problems OPS is trying to solve with the takeover plan are real, and we need to help them find a good solution. These are some of the reasons the district has stated for wanting to take over suburban schools:

• They do not have the money they need to educate lower-income children in their district who have little reinforcement for education at home.
• They do not have the money they need to serve non-English speaking children in their district.
• The children of the district deserve the same educational opportunities as children in suburban districts.
• The current system is creating segregation.

“These are indeed valid issues,” Nabity said, “but I submit to you today that they cannot and will not be solved if the OPS takeover plan is successful. Here’s why I believe this is true: the Reason Foundation and the national accounting firm Deloitte completed a thorough review of public school systems nationwide and found that consolidating schools into very large districts has not been successful.”

“Large consolidations have proven to drive up administrative costs, increase bureaucracy and adversely impact student learning. When they examined school spending patterns, they found that there is a strong correlation between district size and per-pupil cost. The larger the district, the higher the cost per pupil—exactly the opposite of what OPS hoped to achieve.”

Nabity continued: “OPS is already one of the largest school districts in the nation. In view of this study, I do not think any of us can honestly recommend the takeover of suburban schools by OPS. But there is an alternative. We can ask suburban school districts to share the load and help us serve the students of Omaha in greatest need. We can create efficiencies, lower property taxes and give these children an equal opportunity to work toward academic excellence.”

“It is with all of this in mind that I am calling for the creation of the ‘Plan for Shared Responsibility’ for education in the Omaha metro area,” Nabity said. “It is a plan that promotes equality, educational fairness, efficiency, lower property taxes, and a sharing of responsibility between districts for educating all of our children.”

Nabity’s plan calls for the following:

• Reassign 23 of the lowest-performing schools in the OPS system to the administrations of eight of the nearest districts, allowing OPS to downsize by 25% or more.
• Funding would flow with each child to districts where schools are reassigned.
• OPS would continue to be the state’s largest district, with a more balanced student population.
• The diversity of eight surrounding districts would be greatly improved.
• Children could stay in their neighborhood schools or opt into other public schools, as they do now.
• Districts would blend existing staff and methods with OPS’ current program to improve student achievement, behavior, attendance, diversity and parental involvement.
• Since enrollment in OPS would be reduced by 25% or more, the non-classroom staff of OPS' central office could be downsized to help reduce property taxes.
• Each district’s business base, foundations, parent organizations, mentoring groups, student groups, civic groups, nonprofit organizations and religious groups could all pitch in to share their strength and experience with families and schools that really need support.